“This article at kold.com perfectly illustrates MAIG’s (Mayors Against Illegal Guns) willingness to use even the most tenuous of reasons to push their bullshit agenda. They’re parading survivors of the Tucson shooting in front of Congress in order to push their “gun show loophole” schtick which has absolutely fuck all to do with Jared Lee Loughner and how the spree killer acquired his weapon. It seems like these poor folks, the survivors, don’t even realize they’re being so blatantly used. MAIG doesn’t see these people as human beings, only opportunities. They’ve been victimized twice.”
Doncha just love that smug, self-satisfied look on her face as she dances in the blood of the wounded and dead? Who is that self-righteous bitch, anyhow?
That may well be one of the little girl’s relatives….
Edit – she’s one of the survivors… she may be wrong but she doesn’t deserve to be called a bitch.
http://www.kold.com/story/16493352/redir.aspx?C=7d768cba1668473b97b566bb168a6dc5&URL=http%3a%2f%2fwww.judiciary.senate.gov%2fhearings%2fhearing.cfm%3fid%3d9b6937d5e931a0b792d258d9b33d0484
“she may be wrong but she doesn’t deserve to be called a bitch.”
She’s trying to disarm citizens so that they can be at the mercy of thugs (government employed or otherwise). I can think of much stronger words to call someone like that than a bitch.
I think that’s the lady who was right there in on the action of disarming Loughner while he attempted to reload.
In any case, the post seems excessively harsh to me. Don’t the MAIG suggestions include something about mental health screening as well as universal background checks? If the MAIG folks were running things, don’t you think some of the nut cases like Loughner would be identified and prevented from getting guns?
And saying the little girl is being victimized twice, is a bit over the top, don’t you think?
Using death and tragedy to further Bloomberg’s campaign to turn us into a nation of sheep? I’m sorry if my words offend you, but I stand by my evaluation of her character.
I’m not offended, I just don’t think an innocent victim of a tragedy deserves to be called names because I disagree with her. Further, it doesn’t achieve anything at all where a cogent, coherent argument for the correct point of view would.
Surviving a tragedy doesn’t elevate someone above anyone else. If she’s wrong, she’s wrong, and if she fits a name then so be it. We can still deliver relevant arguments and facts while calling people out for what they are.
This. A friend of mine tried using the “he’s attacking a victim!” (literally his exact words) argument regarding someone calling out that ROTC pansy that survived the VT shooting and is crying to ban guns. Just because something bad happened to you doesn’t make you above criticism or always right.
She’s not a bitch because she’s anti gun, nor because she was the victim of violence.
She’s a bitch because she’s dancing in the blood of the fallen in order to further her political agenda that will have consequences that are antithetical to what she says she wants.
This. Thank you, HSR.
Again, next said that she’s above criticism… I said calling her a bitch achieves nothing positive for our argument. People without logical arguments often resort to name calling to fill in for the point they’re failing to make… I’m sorry to see so many making that error here. Again, she’s wrong, but she did risk her life disarming a killer, and if she’s on one side, and the other side is calling her a bitch, an undecided in between is going to side with her and whatever she’s saying.
My .02.
I understand where you’re going with that…
Just to be clear, I don’t advocate the use of ad-hominem attacks.
HOWEVER, someone did use one, which was apt, and you seemingly countered that such was incorrect — that is to say, that you seemed to be saying that said term did not apply to this person — rather than saying that you disagreed with the use of ad-hominem attacks.
My point was simply that the argumentum ad hominem wasn’t just petty namecalling, but was, in fact, calling a spade a spade.
If your intent was to caution against the use of ad-hominem attacks, then I misinterpreted your previous post, and you have my apologies.
If you want to prevent another jared lee loughner how about helping states strengthen how the mentally ill are reported to NCIS so they cannot buy a gun like the rest of us? The system we have in place now is a failure, bottom line too many people who should not be able to buy guns because of serious mental illness can buy them. Then when one of the nutjobs goes all nutty and kills a bunch of people lawful gunowners are suddenly the scapegoat.
And how about the 4 CONVICTED MURDERERS that the ex-governor of Mississippi just pardoned, not to mention the 195 other felons that he also pardoned? Now they will not have a criminal record, and the government has no idea where they are and they will be free to legally own weapons. That asshat governor should have to be held personally accountable for any and all crimes that are committed due to his pardoning of 199 convicted felons.
Already a bunch of them are missing.
But what could possibly go wrong? I’m sure they’re just off meditating of their past wrongdoing.
From what I understand the reporting wasn’t even the issue with Loughner. The people around him knew he was a danger (cops were called to remove him from class because he was making threats) but it never got to the point where he was committed for any mental condition. If I recall he also made death threats over the phone and had the police pay him a visit at home. Certainly his parents knew something was up, he had that death shrine or whatever it was in their backyard.
Maybe those weren’t enough to get him charged or involuntarily committed, but it definitely wasn’t a gun store owner’s fault for not knowing as they’ve been trying to insinuate.
In short, the mental health system in this country sucks, and it needs to get better.
Also, another HUGE part of this issue is the attitude of the left with regard to quasi-children. On the one hand, they view those over 18 as being “adults” and so do their best to block the parents from having any knowledge that the “adult” doesn’t specifically authorize, while simultaneously treating them like children.
In short, the problem is that the left wants to have it’s cake, and eat it too.
“In short, the mental health system in this country sucks, and it needs to get better.”
Definitely, and I’ve heard this in regards to vets and them not getting timely treatment as well.
Some people are going to get missed no matter what, but I think the Loughner case was avoidable. Nothing I’ve read indicates he was just a normal guy who went crazy out of nowhere, the people who interacted with him on a regular basis definitely knew for some time that something was up.
For every shooting victim I see, that’s one more reason for me to firmly believe that you can’t rely on the police/government to protect you and yours. Something that this generation has forgotten is self reliance. Let’s bring it back.
This is how I think too. I am my family’s first line of defense
True. Gun haters will tell you that it’s the job of law enforcement to prevent crime, but for some strange reason they can’t explain why the best the police can do is to show up after the fact to write the report.
The kold dot com link didn’t work for me. Is the old broad with the cunning, evil looking puss one of the Illegal Mayors?
That kind of exploitation really burns me up.
She’s one of the survivors. I ardently disagree with her, but I understand why she feels the way she does as much as I understand why a black man who survives a lynching might push for stronger hate crime legislation (something I also disagree with). Name calling isn’t going to win our fight, particularly when we don’t know who we’re calling names. Logic is the only thing that’s going to convince people like her than more laws and restrictions wouldn’t have prevented this tragedy.http://www.kold.com/story/16493352/redir.aspx?C=7d768cba1668473b97b566bb168a6dc5&URL=http%3a%2f%2fwww.judiciary.senate.gov%2fhearings%2fhearing.cfm%3fid%3d9b6937d5e931a0b792d258d9b33d0484
Oh, and Brighton’s better 😛
People who are really determined to hurt large numbers of other people will find ways to do it. Giffords was meeting with constituents outside a Safeway. If Loughner hadn’t had a gun, he could have loaded up a pickup with a bunch of gas cans, driven it into the crowd and blown them up. Or he could have made pipe bombs out of ordinary, readily available materials and killed a bunch of people that way.
These kinds of mass killings are horrible, but dealing with them in any sort of policy way is extremely difficult. They’re so individual it’s hard to see how you could have a large scale response to them. They’re like multicar pile-ups. They’re attention-grabbing, extremely low probability, high-impact events that are extremely hard to prevent.
No one needs to look farther than Timothy McVeigh to see that you’re right!
McVeigh! But that was an *inside job*…
/sarcasm
Funny you should say that as the ” Inspire ” magazine tells the ” Believers” to kill the ” Infidels” using a truck to run them over in a crowded area.
Ban all trucks?
Brighton is not better, so there!
I still maintain that she looks cunning and evil. The photographer’s capturing of that image, at that instant, of that woman, holding that picture of that child, with that look on her face, in the context of the headline and the introduction above, evokes that visceral and emotional response in me, from the context of the photographer’s composition that meets my eyes. I may have gone off half cocked, not knowing exactly what or who was being portrayed and not being able to open the link to gain a deeper understanding, but I’m not making any excuses and I can live with what I’ve said. Still, if that woman is exploiting her “victimhood”, and bringing that child along for the ride, I object to that on a number of grounds and levels. If she thinks that playing the victim card and using emotional manipulation is the right course to take to advance an agenda calculated to diminish other people’s civil rights, then I have very strong objections to those tactics. I can well and fully empathize and sympathize with what she has gone through, and I can well and fully understand how and why she is feeling and acting as she does. Still, that is no excuse, to my way of thinking.
I lived in Allston for a few years… it was fun but after a while I got tired of all the noise and craziness so I retired to the burbs of Oak Square… I’ll be moving to New Hampshire next, where the SCAR shall finally be mine…
At any rate, I still disagree, but the conversation seems to have run it’s course.
Funny part is that the father of the girl that died said he did not want anyones freedom constricted because of this….so they dance in her blood and her family’s views. Maybe we should fight fire with fire and parade around every unarmed person killed in DC, Baltimore, NY….etc
It has to be the fault of the guns or the guns shows that Loughner was able to get his hands on a gun. It simply cannot be the fault of the moronic laws that prevented anyone from disclosing that Loughner was a drug addict and psycho.
The Army knew that Loughner was disqualified from gun ownership. In fact, Loughner disclosed his disqualification to the Army. But the Army never reported him to anyone because of Loughner’s “privacy rights.” There are nine dead in Tucson because of that suicidal deference to HIPAA, notwithstanding the fact that the Army was not bound by HIPAA in this case.
It’s not a coincidence that the same asshats who run MAIG are the very same asshats who pushed HIPAA to its illogical extreme. Because of the MIAGs of the world, millions of American have no means of protecting themselves from the crazy people on the street.
+1. And dont forget that the very MAIG members are hypocrites (Mayor Sam Jones ). They can defend themselves WE on the other hand are left to be victims if they (MAIG, Brady bunch, Romney and so on and on and on………..) get their way.
From Patricia Maisch, the lady who actually took the magazines out of Loughner’s hand and threw them away:
“I don’t know if it would have changed the outcome of January 8th in Tucson, but every gun sale should have a background check.”
Her point of view is irrational, and likely fed by the chicken hawks at MAIG; I think a rational discussion with this woman, or at least politely pointing out the gaps in her logic would do us all well.
If she’s weak-minded and weak-willed enough to allow herself to be used like a tool by MAIG, not to mention stupid enough to not see how gun ownership could have PREVENTED the shooting, then no amount of logical discussion will have an effect.
She’s a pawn, and pawns aren’t worth the effort. It’s the real villains who are the true enemies, like the MAIG heads. She’s just a disillusioned fool, whereas the politicians are knowingly and willingly corrupt and willing to sell out freedom for their own power.
For what it’s worth, I admire your optimism regarding people’s good sides, but I can’t share it. If someone stands in the way or demolishes liberty due to ignorance and emotion, despite their intention, they’re still an enemy and need to be regarded as such.
“gun ownership could have PREVENTED the shooting”
I thought we had this conversation on a previous article…
Gun ownership and possession doesn’t really mean you’re likely to PREVENT a random crazy person (like Loughner) from going out in public to try to kill people.
What gun ownership and possession do is allow us to prevent random crazy people (like Loughner) from indiscriminately killing a large number of people.
In short, the choice isn’t between murder and no murder, it’s between murder and massacre.
Ok, true, it would have prevented further deaths, or as many deaths.
Not surprised — push emotion and politcal climate of the day to get your way because the idiots on the hill may understand facts, but the people who vote do not.
This is what we have become….we throw out facts for feel good moments
They need to close the Dupnik Loophole.
The other facet is the widespread and completely inappropriate finger pointing that has gone on in the name of civil discourse. Again, this has zero to do with Loughner and his personal warped agenda. He was in a paranoid fantasy world. It’s truly tragic that all of the attention and discussion given to this matter has had precious little to do with discussing what may be changed or done better in the case of an obviously troubled young man.
I had tried to post earlier…MSNBC had extensive coverage and media event of Gifford and the Tuscon shootings to promote their agenda. Surprised TTAG did not have a blog on it.
Comments are closed.